james_camerons_avatarfandomcom-20200222-history
Talk:James Cameron's Avatar: The Game
Alternate retelling or a prologue (of some kind)? I was reading the wiki entry and this question started to bug my mind. Mainly because I've been in the assumption that the story in the game happens prior to the events of the film. I know that Ubisoft had almost complete freedom over the game and it could be seen as an alternative story. All of the interviews that I've seen just say that the game "tells its own story". Which could mean a retelling, or a prologue depending on the view. Then again, Cameron has said that he might consult Ubisoft for ideas before making the sequel(s), which could favor the opinion that game and film do coexist in the same timeline but in different times of it. Or it could very well just mean that Ubisoft has good ideas =P. And it's even mentioned in the game that its story takes place roughly two years before the story in the movie. Quaritch's survival would suggest that the events could be happening before the film. Even so this is all just theorizing, so if someone knows the facts, please do correct me. Sorry for the bad grammar and not being very clear, but it's 6 a.m so my mind isn't at its sharpest =P. --LuckyMan 04:39, December 25, 2009 (UTC) Umm He doesn't take Jake's place. He is stationed at Hell's Gate, Jake wasn't.--Lekgolo 02:15, December 27, 2009 (UTC) The reasons why it's a retelling. Okay, people have been changing the game's "story" article from saying that it's a retelling to being a prequel that takes place 2 years ago. It seems more like a Retelling because of these chief reasons: - For one, if it takes place two years before the movie, wouldn't the big changes that occurred in the game obviously influence the RDA's policy towards Avatars and the Na'vi in general? For example, in the game it shows that the CHIEF LEADER of the AVTR Program, Dr. Rene Harper, plus a few other LEADING scientists have now openly defected to the Na'vi after the game's intro. Wouldn't the RDA or the universe's fictional news agencies take notice of such a debacle? And the fact that OPEN WAR breaks out at the beginning of the game would mean that the RDA now has no use of the Avatars because they now know that the AVTR Program is staffed by too many environmentally concerned, Na'vi sympathizing scientists anyway. Even learning about their communal culture, concerns about the environment, the extremely intricate details of Pandora's plants and animals, or educating those Na'vi children with English would take an obvious back seat to the one practical concern of winning the damn war and surviving on Pandora. Even if the movie took place a whole two years after these events, I'm definitely sure the Na'vi or the RDA wouldn't sit idly about and just try to coexist with each other during those two years with Avatars and education programs; skirmishes and search-and-destroy missions taking place would seem like more logical events that would take place a mere two years after the war is supposedly over. - Also, at least to my sources, I haven't found a source yet that specifically says the game takes place exactly two years before the movie. I haven't even found it in the game's official website, or even in the game's instruction booklet itself. If anyone could give me a link showing that it does take place two years before the movie, it would be greatly appreciated. - Furthermore, since the last level in the game takes place in the area immediately around the Tree of Souls, same as the area in the last battle in the movie, wouldn't the Na'vi all unite to protect it anyway, seeing as they're very communal and would die to protect Eywa? The outcome of the last battle in the game means that the losing side would be severely depleted of manpower and resources, meaning that a similiar spectacle would be quite difficult to replicate at the same location a mere two years later, which is when the movie takes place. Also, how come the wildlife didn't save the Na'vi in the game at the last level over the Tree of Souls? Wouldn't Eywa, being a sentient planetary entity, be aware of the RDA's intent to take control of Pandora through the emulator? So, wouldn't just sending the wildlife off to combat the RDA then and there, BEFORE they overrode Eywa's sentience and took control of Eywa be more practical than just leaving the Na'vi defenders alone to combat the RDA and their technology? The whole series of events in the game seem to cancel out a lot of things that take place in the movie. - Lastly, it is not officially stated which ending is canon, seeing as if the Na'vi won the war, then they would've quickly taken the opportunity to drive the RDA out of the planet via the reinvigorated Tree of Souls and the wildlife like in the movie, especially with the avatar of Able Ryder at the forefront and the RDA's forces now weakened. Likewise, if the RDA won the war, then there wouldn't be any of that communal Eywa stuff the Na'vi use with the other animals and plants, seeing as their psionic link to Pandora has now been cut off because of the RDA's emulator machine; in the RDA's ending, it shows Banshees throwing off their Na'vi riders who're coming to attack Able Ryder, even when their queue things are attached, which happened because the emulator machine was activated and configured by Able Ryder. Thus, seeing as the RDA holds control over Eywa because of the emulator machine, do you really think they're going to cede this decisive advantage back to their alien enemy? Now, unless James Cameron himself or any of his official affiliated agencies says otherwise, it seems to me like the game is essentially a retelling rather than a prequel. --Ploxis 00:11, December 30, 2009 (UTC) Yeah i agree with everything you have said there. i never thought about it that much though. it's doesn't really make sense if it takes place 2 years before the movie. first of all, Able Rider ends up turning Na'vi after his human form was killed by the RDA. yet there has only been 1 Avatar/human to turn Na'vi. and the fact that all that happened in the game had nothing to do in the movie... u have pretty much explained what i want to say about it. YES the game states that it is 2 years before the movie (the game it self tells you so that's my source), it kinda feels like some things in the game are ment to be 2 years before and somethings were not. more to the side of not because if they were the Avatar movie would not be told how it is. now im just confusing my self haha. other opinions?? -Avatar- 00:35, December 30, 2009 (UTC) :I agree that this game can't be a full-fledged prequel, there would be plotholes the size of Pandora =P. The thing is that it's not classified as "anything". Neither prequel or retelling (not at least by any source I've found) and that it would raise some interesting notes if it would be connected to the movie in any way. Like when Grace notes in the movie that "diplomatic relations tend to weaken when you point a gun at them". I've wondered what that conflict was (I presume it was a conflict). The game would give one answer to this. :I realize that this is far fetched and I am quite content with the wiki page saying that it is a retelling. Basically I'm just throwing out ideas and trying to get a different point of view for the sake of conversation. :I also agree that unless we get a statement from someone who knows his business (Cameron etc.) telling the game to be a definitive prequel is more of a fan fiction than true fact. --LuckyMan 00:47, December 30, 2009 (UTC) Quick question though... You said that the game itself tells you. Is this in the intro? because all I saw was the opening scene where the Valkyrie shuttle begins to descend. Then again, I must've missed that part or something because I wasn't bothering to look at small text somewhere at an obscure corner of the screen XP --Ploxis 00:51, December 30, 2009 (UTC)Ploxis :It says so in the main menu screen where it plays those "fun facts" (it's one of them). --LuckyMan 00:53, December 30, 2009 (UTC) yeah where it slides from the bottom of the screen from right to left. retelling vs prequel Ive played through the game with the RDA here are the reasons I think its a prequel in the game the head of security is commandr falco once he goes rogue the RDA sends Quaritich (no scar) Dr. Monroe is the science geek but hes not the head of the avatar program. in the game intro Dr. augustine says you'll be working with Monroe. The reason The RDA doesn't abandon the avatar program is because they have already been grown and destroying them would be a waste of money (speculation) There are three dragon gunships in the game one gets shot down by Na'vi the other one is seen crashed on the plains of Goliath the third is in the movie. (more Speculation) Im guessing this movie takes place 10 years before the movie which would go with quaritch not rotating home. If any one could confirm the year the game takes place that would clear things up. but playing as RDA they take over the Tree of Souls do they not?? so if they took over it in the game how come there is nothing about it in the movie?? if they could control pandora at the end of the game the movie takes no pace in this story line... -Avatar- 01:07, December 30, 2009 (UTC) :Yeah, this is one of the biggest holes. Of course we can speculate about the time between the end of game and the start of movie. what would happen between this time, would the Na'vi regain control somehow, or something else. But this would all just be speculation and by any means not meant for the actual wiki page. :If we'd really want the game to be a prequel I think that the Na'vi ending would work better. As commander Falco would be dead (so not in the movie) and Ryder stating "more humans will come". Of course this still leaves us with big questions as "where's Ryder in movie". He might have died before the movie, or as he is part of the Tipani clan he is not mentioned. The other question of course is "why's there no mention of the war". I think that RDA would want to keep such things under the carpet but that wouldn't explain why it isn't told to the audience. :But once again it's just speculation. --LuckyMan 01:24, December 30, 2009 (UTC) Firstly, major kudos to whoever fights for the RDA because big guns and flamethrowers kick ass :D Anyway, to the one who made the prequel comment, the bio for Commander Falco says that he is second only to Colonel Quaritch in the RDA command structure when he was stationed on Pandora, which would imply that the good Col. has not been newly brought in the planet to replace Falco when he went rogue, but merely transferred to the current battlezone that Falco was supposed to be in; Pandorapedia also says that Col. Quaritch wears his scars "as a mark of pride on Pandora" or something like that, implying that the first time you see Col. Quaritch is not his first time on Pandora. Also, Dr. Monroe has nothing to do with the movie, because he was killed by Falco in the RDA's storyline. And what do Dragon gunships have to do with the game being a prequel? They are produced en-masse by the RDA's robotic factories, as stated in the Pandorapedia. Lastly, I can see why the RDA wouldn't abandon the AVTR program, but the events in the game would at least warrant a freakin' big overhaul of the Avatar Program, like replacing any traitorous scientists with military personnel, so that the AVTR Program wouldn't be as.... open and cultural with the Na'vi at least, and so you would probably get different people in the Program that would most likely influence Jake to not side with the Na'vi, and the overhauled Avatars and personnel would probably be.... I don't know... less furry, but that's room for another discussion :) --Ploxis 01:31, December 30, 2009 (UTC)Ploxis I know bringing this up is a bit of beating a dead horse, what with these edits being quite old. However I just recently played the game for the second time and I noticed something about the ending. If you do the N'avi ending it's all very ambiguous and it honestly doesn't really fit in with the movie very well. This is ironic since the N'avi campaign is far, far more fleshed out and enjoyable than the RDA. But the RDA one actually DOES fit into canon a bit. The emulator is used and disrupts connections to Eywa all over Pandora but Grace herself says in the ending that this disruption won't last long and merely serves to show Eywa what humans are capable of. She says this like it's a good thing but it honestly wouldn't be a huge stretch to imagine that this is one of the things that makes Eywa help at the end of the movie. Also it's a good while between the game and the movie so it's not hard to imagine that Ryder is potentially dead, specifically targeted for what s/he did during the game. Falco dies either way and the grunts who served under him would likely be reassigned or moved to different work since they might be suspect since their superior went rogue. It's honestly not too far fetched to even just imagine all of the humans are simply dead by the time the game starts. The game and movie still don't fit very well but it's not as improbable as some make it out to be to weld the two together. --Misfit119 (talk) 13:01, August 14, 2014 (UTC) Prequel, but not canon If the game states it is a prequel, it is a prequel, despite the plotholes. Perhaps it is not canon. In the games world, both the movie and the game take place in the same universe, but in the movie, the games story never existed. I will remain neutral, because I have not actually seen whether it is a prequel in the game, but in a video I watched James Cameron say's that the games extends the Avatar universe. Wormulon 01:36, December 30, 2009 (UTC) Quick question on multiplayer mode Seeing as the game's online multiplayer mode is quite popular and the stats & gameplay on the weapons and armor are slightly different from the campaign mode itself, in addition to the different ways the factions play, should there be a separate article on the game's multiplayer? It would also be a good place to list some tips for the different factions as well, like offering some faction-specific tactics or just teamwork tactics in general.Ploxis 00:33, January 15, 2010 (UTC) stop James Cameron himself has said the game is a prequel to the Movie. Its the only reason he chose Ubisoft over other developers, they are the only one that didn't want to make a retelling of the movie story. Please stop changing the wiki page. [[User:JayBO|'JayBo']] Talk IRC 22:52, January 15, 2010 (UTC) Is there a link to James saying this, like an interview or a youtube video? Ploxis 23:00, January 15, 2010 (UTC) I shall find and post for all to see, give me a few to find it again [[User:JayBO|'JayBo']] Talk IRC 23:01, January 15, 2010 (UTC) Ok, around 1 minute and 20 seconds found here [[User:JayBO|'JayBo']] Talk IRC 23:11, January 15, 2010 (UTC) Also, "The plot has been written to be a companion to the film, with the story line taking place roughly 2 years before that of the film." from Brent George [[User:JayBO|'JayBo']] Talk IRC 23:32, January 15, 2010 (UTC) Alright, the film takes place 2 years before the movie, but it isn't a prequel per se, as it is a "companion" to the film; this and the obvious plotholes that emerge from the game would not tie in well with the movie. Therefore, it's best to view the game as it's own thing, separate from the movie's story, because Cameron did mention a sequel to this game alongside a sequel to the movie, and of course it's only reasonable that the storyline to the game's sequel follows the ending that the player chose. It's like two alternate stories- one from the movie and one from the game- in one universe..... I gotta say, Cameron did indeed make yet another good marketing ploy.Ploxis 00:11, January 16, 2010 (UTC) In terms of prequal as in a part of the story I agree it isnt, merely that it takes place before the setting of the movie. I think that the article does not use the term prequal, if it does it shoulf be reworded. [[User:JayBO|'JayBo']] Talk IRC 00:37, January 16, 2010 (UTC) Siding with the Na'vi If people could refrain from editing the 'If you choose Na'vi' section in game plot for 24hours it would be much appreciated. I'm going to replay the whole thing to get the article straight and more detailed (someone focused more on the RDA side). I you want to edit it post your edit here and i'll put it in, or you can later - if you want the credit for the edit :) .IWantheUltimateChange 11:36, January 22, 2010 (UTC) : You could put in the Template:Inuse to that section. Most people won't check this discussion page prior to editing the article. Faern. 11:58, January 22, 2010 (UTC) : Nvm, I see you already did. Faern. 12:01, January 22, 2010 (UTC) :: Right i have changed this part of the article up to the Tantalus part. My console has finally succumbed against its long fight against RROD and E74 so I wrote the text after that point based on when I played through the game when it came out. If anyone could rectify any problems with that text please fix it. --IWantheUltimateChange 11:41, January 26, 2010 (UTC) Was Neytiri in the game? I haven't played the game yet (I haven't had a chance to buy it), but I know that Grace, Trudy, and Quaritch are the only movie characters featured in the game. However, I thought I read somewhere (I don't know where) that Neytiri made a small cameo in the game. Is this true, or am I just imagining things? Tsu'tey te Rongloa Ateyitan 21:55, January 30, 2011 (UTC)Tsu'tey te Rongloa Ateyitan :You have answered the question yourself in your first sentence. Faern. 3D-HD-Pics 22:07, January 30, 2011 (UTC) Defective by Design - Critical Reception Regarding my recent edit to add a link to the Wikipedia page on "defective by design", in the Critical Recepetion part of the article (...therefore it is tagged as "Defective by Design") can someone in the know confirm that that is what is being meant i.e. add a citation? A bit of quick preliminary research suggests that they are obviously linked. However I'm not 100% sure if that is correct so the edit can always be reverted. --IWantheUltimateChange 13:37, April 25, 2011 (UTC)